The incomprehensibly monumental stimulus offers $500 billion economic stabilization plan in loans, loan guarantees and investments.
But Democrats made sure it doesn’t help the badly hit businesses of Trump.
A summary released by Democrat Chuck Schumer’s office laid down that there will be no place for “businesses owned by the president, vice president, members of the Congress or heads of executive departments and their children, spouses or in-laws” in the mega stimulus to get the nation back on its feet. That essentially means that businesses under Brand Trump hit by the slump won’t be able to benefit from the stimulus plan of the country that the US President wants to make great again.
The US$2 trillion stimulus plan agreed to by White House and Senate leaders would ban any company controlled by President Donald Trump or his children from receiving loans or investments from Treasury programs. As per CNN’s Jeremy Herb, keeping President Trump from using the funds for his own business was one of the Democrats’ key concern. This almost looks like Democrat vendetta against Trump more than concern to get the US stimulus plan out asap. Funnily enough, this makes Trump look like the bigger man in the room, a moment for keepsake.
A Deep Well of Mistrust
US Senate’s $2 trillion stimulus responds to the Coronavirus-induced economic recession. It reaches every single American with assistance, with cash for every citizen, a gigantic stimulus for businesses and hardest-hit sectors and millions who lost their jobs. Trump’s properties along with the Hotel Industry fall into this category. In fact, in the build-up to the stimulus plan, President Trump had “voiced his desire” that the economic lending and bailout program to have the hotel industry among its “corporate beneficiaries”. Furthermore, Trump stated that he’d personally oversee the corporate bailout package, “We’re going to make good deals.”
Much to the annoyance of the Democrats, Trump had refused to reject conflict of interest. When asked to vow his companies won’t benefit from the plan, Trump was at his cryptic best. That added fire to the “deep well of distrust between Democrats and Mr. Trump” contributing to stalling of the agreement, as written by Emily Cochrane and Nicholas Fandos in the New York Times. Ghosts from the last economic bailout in 2008 “hung over the talks, a cautionary tale of the political risks of sending federal money to corporations with unpredictable consequences,” they write.
Mistrust Or Inherent Bias?
In an interview with NPR’s Steve Inskeep on her apprehensions about the corporate bail-out program, Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren opined that the draft could get “huge bags of cash” for “Trump hotel properties, like Mar-a-Lago” which could then “fire their workers. Warren also said it could very well happen if Secretary of US Treasury Steve Mnuchin “decides he wants to do a real solid for his boss using taxpayer dollars”.
Senator Warren based her fears on the experience of what happened when there weren’t enough restrictions on the bailout package. She added that Trump’s initial stimulus package was “far worse than the worst critique” of President Bush’s 2008 bank bailout. Moreover, Trump adds to Democrat fears. Unlike previous Presidents including Bush, he still very much keeps his business interests intact. Trump still holds assets that could very easily cause conflicts of interest. He just transferred them to a revocable trust. Donald Trump Jr. and the CFO of his The Trump Organization look after it.
But that taken into account, Warren’s 2008 experience is based on lack of firm oversight. A letter from Chuck Schumer’s office to the Senators mentioned that the bill contains provisions for “strict oversight of any loans to businesses, prompt public disclosure, and limits that will prevent corruption”. Moreover, Democrats also have independent oversight of a $500 billion corporate $500 billion lending program. The argument that banning Trump’s businesses from the stimulus plan, even if they are directly impacted by the pandemic-caused slump, is a part of that strict oversight just looks like hidden vendetta from the Democrats.